Blaming ZF does no good. FCA chose them as a supplier. once you chose a supplier, their issues become your issues.The 9-speed problems should be rightly addressed to ZF. Every single customer using this transmission had the same issues. The bigger problem is that FCA was the only one using it in non-premium brands, and the less you charge for a product, the more people are likely to complain. (Case in point, Range Rover, whose Evoque has the same problems, but buyers just accept it as part of the price to own a Range Rover)
I know how industries work, You make assumptions and we know that that means.There’s a tendency on here to assume that the reason why the 9-speed had customer problems was because FCA modified it - that’s not true, and it’s frequently used to build a narrative that FCA cost-cuts itself into problems. The 8HP was similarly modified, and I don’t hear complaints about that.
It’s true that a supplier’s issues are your issues, but to blame the final manufacturer for the failure of that supplier to resolve those problems, when only the supplier could have resolved them, is playing a bit too dumb on a forum populated by people who are enthusiasts and know a bit more than Average Joe about how the car industry works.
For the record, yes, it hurt FCA’s reputation, not ZF’s, but that doesn’t make the root cause FCA’s. ZF was a trusted supplier with a proven track record from the 8HP series, a transmission that FCA also modified under license to great success. Applying hindsight to what was a sound decision at the time based on the available evidence is just moaning.
First, if the shortcoming of the 9 speed weren't uncovered during testing, the testing process is deeply flawed.I don’t know why you imply that WCM processes were ignored here, because both FCA and ZF made several updates to the transmission software and components to minimise the effect of the dog-gear changes. But ultimately, that knocking is a characteristic of how the transmission was designed, just as much as a whine is a characteristic of a CVT.
SRT and AWD were popular rumors of upcoming Dart features 8 years ago.An AWD Dart caught testing sounds like the basis of the rally car, since it ran a 2L turbo with AWD.
I'm not under the belief that they were going to take it seriously. Even if it ran the GME is very early testing, the only transmission capable of taking that torque was the 9 speed, unless they bought another transmission, but that just reeks of making a new 'SRT4' as expensive as possible, and not cheap like the 2 SRT4's before it.
No, let's shorten the powertrain warranty. That way we can keep cost down.Some people do not realize the damage that it did. On top of other transmission issues that other vehicles had as well at the time. So what did they do? They launched another dud that has managed to undo what small bit of progress had been made on the quality front drive line wise. What they should do is back their autos with a bullet proof warranty to try and persuade customers.